THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I vs. M/S.APOLLO TYRES LTD
What did the High Court hold?
The Tribunal held that the DG Power Generation Units I and II qualified as an 'undertaking' for the purpose of Section 80-IA. The High Court followed its previous judgment on similar appeals for the same assessee and assessment year.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against the Tribunal's order which allowed the assessee to claim deduction under Section 80-IA for its DG Power Generation Units. The Revenue questioned whether these units constituted an 'undertaking' for the purpose of the said section.
What were the issues?
Whether DG Power Generation Units I and II constitute an 'undertaking' under Section 80-IA and are thus eligible for deduction.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS THURSDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 7TH SRAVANA, 1943 ITA NO. 184 OF 2013 AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA 379/2009 OF I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH, ERNAKULAM APPELLANT/S: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I COCHIN. BY ADVS. SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT SRI.K.M.V.PANDALAI, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT RESPONDENT/S: M/S.APOLLO TYRES LTD 6TH FLOOR, CHERUPUSHPAM BUILDINGS, SHANMUGHAM ROAD, COCHIN-682 031 BY ADVS. SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS SRI.ABRAHAM JOSEPH MARKOS SRI.ABRAHAM VARGHESE THARAKAN SRI.BINU MATHEW SRI.JOSEPH MARKOSE SR. SRI.TOM THOMAS KAKKUZHIYIL THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING ON 29.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
I.T.A. No.184/2013 -2- J U D G M E N T S.V. Bhatti, J. Heard learned Standing Counsel Mr. Christopher Abraham and learned Senior Counsel Mr. Joseph Markos for parties. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax/Revenue is the appellant. M/s. Apollo Tyres Ltd., Kochi/Assessee is the respondent. The subject appeal is at the instance of Revenue from the order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal'), Cochin Bench in ITA No.379/Coch/2009 dated 21.12.2012. The Tribunal, through the order under appeal, confirmed the order of CIT (Appeals) by holding that the assessee is entitled to claim deduction under section 80-IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) for the DG Power
I.T.A. No.184/2013 -3- Generation Units I and II as coming within the meaning of ‘undertaking’. The substantial questions of law raised are as follows: “i. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal is right in law and fact in holding that DG Power Generation Units I and II constituted an ‘undertaking’ under Section 80-IA of the Income Tax Act? ii Whether DG Power Generation Units I and II are entitled to the benefit of Section 80-IA of the Income Tax Act?” 3. The Revenue filed ITA No.69/2011 and ITA No.70/2011 raising the very same substantial questions as raised in the instant appeal. ITA Nos. 69 and 70/2011 are filed for the Assessment Year 2002-03. On 27.02.2019 the appeals filed by the Revenue were dismissed and answered the question in favour of the assessee and against the Revneue.
I.T.A. No.184/2013 -4- 4. By following the judgment of this Court dated 27.02.2019 in ITA Nos.69 and 70/2011, the substantial questions framed in the instant case are answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The appeal stands dismissed, accordingly. No order as to costs. Sd/- S.V.BHATTI JUDGE Sd/- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE jjj
I.T.A. No.184/2013 -5- APPENDIX OF ITA 184/2013 PETITIONER ANNEXURE ANNEXURE A COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 143(3) RWS 147 DATED 12.12.2008 PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR A6 2004-05 ANNEXURE B COPY OF THE CIT (A)S ORDER NO 24,25,26 & 27/R-/E/CIT-11/08-09 DATED 30.3.2009 ANNEXURE C COPY OF THE ITATS ORDER ITA NO 379/COCH/2009 DATED 21.12.2012 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05.
More judgments on Section 80-IA
- ACIT-Circle 6(1)(1) Mumbai, Mumbai vs Aditya Birla Real Estate Limited, MumbaiITA 7767/MUM/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2013-14
- ACIT-Circle6(1)(1) Mumbai., Mumbai vs Aditya Birla Real Estate Limited, MumbaiITA 7766/MUM/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
- DCIT, Central Circle- 2(4), Chennai vs Eco Protection Engineers Private Limited…ITA 597/CHNY/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed18 Sept 2026AY 2017-18
- Shyam Metalics and Energy Limited, Kolkata vs DCIT, Central Circle 1(1), KolkataITTPA 12/KOL/2026[2022-2023]Status: Heard11 Sept 2026AY 2022-2023
- State Bank of India, Mumbai vs ACIT-Circle- 2(2)(1), MumbaiITA 3429/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: Disposed11 Sept 2026AY 2013-14
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Aasha Industries vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Bharat Iron Scrap vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Mascot Constructions Co. And Another vs. The Commissioner Of Goods And Services Tax (GST) And AnotherBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Ankil Jagdishchandra Kholwadwala vs. Union Of INDIA And AnrBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Fasil Hussain Shah vs. Ut Of J And K Th Commissioner Secretary TO Government Finance Department And OthersJammu and Kashmir and Ladakh · 21 Oct 2026